Saturday, April 18, 2015

Early this morning, Fan Expo Canada banned Honey Badger Brigade (HBB) from the Calgary Comics and Entertainment Expo (CalEx). Security staff approached the HBB booth, ordered us to leave, and refused to state the reason why unless Alison Tieman agreed to speak to them away from the other members of the group, without recording. They informed Alison that they had received complaints on social media, including 25 allegations of harassment. No evidence was presented, no request was made for information from HBB, and no specific incident was cited until further questions were asked of security.

Upon further questioning, security mentioned the Women in Comics panel discussion from the previous day, where Alison was given permission to speak. Alison spoke briefly in relation to a topic brought up by the panelists. Accusers, however, claimed that Alison derailed the conversation. Alison and myself were in attendance, and you can listen to Alison’s statement in the panel here on YouTube. You can hear Alison, myself and indeed the entire panel in the full discussion record.

As you will hear, there was no harrassment. Expo staff and mob rule, in their crusade for ending harassment against women, harassed the Honey Badgers despite having no evidence of any policy violation.

This is what we are up against. This is why I will never back down, why I will never ever apologize for thinking, speaking, and writing freely. This is why I am the Leader of #GamerGate and why you should be too.

The real crime of the Honey Badger Brigade, for which they were successfully attacked, was not "reportedly disrupting panels", but rather "associating with GamerGate".

Think about it. A group of women were just harassed and driven out of a convention for being guilty by association. And the SJWs claim that we are the intolerant ones, we are the uncivil ones, we are the ones harassing women, we are the ones trying to drive others from the public discourse. Meanwhile, the moderates claim that the problem is our tone, that we're simply not being nice enough, that if only we didn't express our "problematic" views but kept them quietly to ourselves, everything would be all right.

Horseshit. Absolute and unadulterated horseshit.

Notice that they wanted to isolate Alison, and speak to her away from the others and without recording. Sound familiar? Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that I am an arrogant, cruel, and ruthless badthinker who eminently deserves every "shitbag" "asshat" "jackass" "dipshit" insult and every denigrating and disqualifying "mentally unbalanced" "racist" "misogynist" "sexist" "anti-Semitic" "homophobic" "Nazi" "white supremacist" description that has been hurled my way by SJWs from New York City to New Zealand for the last 10 years. Even if all of those accusations were perfectly true, how would that explain the coordinated assault on the Honey Badger Brigade?

Did that take place in response to me? If I was just a little nicer, if my rhetoric dripped with pure honey rather than pure contempt, if I lovingly laved Teresa Nielsen-Hayden's warty folds with my tongue and dutifully nominated John Scalzi and Charles Stross and Patrick Nielsen-Hayden for awards so those three giants of modern science fiction could add to their collective total of 39 Hugo nominations (only 8 more than Robert Heinlein, Isaac Asimov, and Arthur C. Clarke combined), would that have somehow prevented the Honey Badgers from being attacked by SJWs and expelled from Calgary Expo?

Several tweets from this morning suggested one of the exhibitors was
proudly demonstrating banners and shirts for GamerGate. It was quickly
revealed this was The Honey Badger Brigade.... Calgary Expo has been actively responding to comments and criticisms
about its decision on Twitter, expressing it had no desire to allow a
GamerGate-themed booth onto the show floor.

This is a cultural war, everyone. And if you're not fighting it, you're losing it.The reason the SJWs went after the Honey Badger Brigade instead of #GamerGate is the same reason they went after Sad Puppies instead of Rabid Puppies. The more publicly acceptable the face of their opposition, the more they are determined to silence and separate it from their most implacable opponents.

It didn't work with Larry and Brad. It won't work with the Honey Badgers either. #GamerGate will not abandon them. What do you say, Rabid Puppies? What do you say, Dread Ilk?

Support the Honey Badgers and join the #GamerGate email campaign against the sponsors of Calgary Expo. Send one email, just one polite little email, to start. I have. That's all it takes... because we are legion.

178 Comments:

Hopefully the Honey Badgers are exploring their legal options. Something I don't hear of often is people seeking damages or restitution from SJWs or businesses/facilities that acted on their behalf. Hit them hard with a punitive lawsuit.

Brad Torgensen has added a post to his blog: "Sad Puppies: We Are Not Rabid Puppies."

Larry Correia has also spoken up on MONSTER HUNTER NATION: "I Am Not Vox Day."

I commend them both for making the distinction so loudly and clearly. And I accept what they say. The Sad Puppies are not Rabid Puppies. Larry Correia is not Vox Day. I regret anything I might have done or said that blurred the line, or created a false impression that all Puppies were the same. (Admittedly, having 'Puppies' in the name of both slates does foster confusion). I am glad you set that straight.

Accept the message of the Sad Puppies. Now drip some honey -

In your last blog post, your wrote:

"The objectives of Sad Puppies 3 have been simple and consistent:

● Use the democratic selection system of the Hugo awards.● No “quiet” logrolling. Make it transparent.● Boost authors, editors, and works — regardless of political persuasion.● Bring recognition to people who’ve been long overlooked.● Get some good promotion for new folks coming up in the field.● Have fun!"

I will take you at your word that these were the aims of the Sad Puppies, as opposed to those of the Rabid Puppies, which seem to be more simply, "Destroy the Hugos, outrage the liberals, and plunge all fandom into war."

I'll give you the fourth and fifth on your list. You did bring recognition to people who had long been overlooked (whether it was a good sort of recognition is another question, but you certainly got their names out there), and you did generate lots of promotion for some newer folks, most notably the Campbell nominees, and, well, the two young writers who have withdrawn.

and then comes the SJW entryism, with a touch of sarcasm? -

One last question. You say you want inclusion. You say you want democracy. And you have already announced Sad Puppies 4, aimed at the 2016 Hugo Awards at Big Mac II. I understand that Kate Paulk of MAD GENIUS CLUB will be running things next year. I presume the mechanism will be the same -- a call for suggestions, which will then somehow be winnowed down to a slate. (If that's wrong, do correct me, I want to have the facts).

So maybe my last question is for Kate Paulk rather than you or Mr. Correia. I don't know. But it's a simple question. When you open up Sad Puppies 4 for nominations...

Can I nominate?

I read a lot of books and stories. I have editors and fan writers and artists I think are shamefully overlooked, same as you. I am a fan too. Can I nominate my own favorites, and be assured that they will be given equal weight to Larry Correia's nominations, and Brad's, and John C. Wright's, and all the other Puppies?

We want democracy. We want transparency. We don't want log-rolling. General elections need to be honest, but primary elections should be honest too. And you guys do NOT believe in any sort of political litmus tests, I know, you've said as much a hundred times... so I know you will welcome my own suggestions for Sad Puppies 4, right? Oh, and PNH and TNH, and N.K. Jemisin, and Connie Willis, and David Gerrold, and John Scalzi, and all my friends in the Brotherhood Without Banners... we all love science fiction, we all love puppies...

Can we play too?

It's not possible to do the soft shoe with these people. You just cannot play nice with them.

Done. Post and email sent. I'll also be looking up the sponsors and sending them emails as well notifying them that I will now avoid their products and encourage others to do so as well. Screw the Calgary Expo.

I await rabid puppies 2: Visigoth edition with eager anticipation. I hope the next round will simply be seeing who can raze the most hell. Remember: Burt the barbarian says 'Pillage THEN burn....' Time to burn.

It’s disappointing that they weren’t there to have a conversation or to listen to what we, and members of the audience, were saying. They wanted to stand up and have their say, but not to listen or try to understand the points of view other people in the room had. This was further proven by the video discussion they posted later last night, in which they mentioned our panel and that we were “donning the ball gowns of our victimhood”, which I’m not even entirely sure how to take. I will admit to not watching the whole video, and I think anyone who attempts to watch it would understand why.

I read a lot of books and stories. I have editors and fan writers and artists I think are shamefully overlooked, same as you. I am a fan too. Can I nominate my own favorites, and be assured that they will be given equal weight to Larry Correia's nominations, and Brad's, and John C. Wright's, and all the other Puppies?

... so I know you will welcome my own suggestions for Sad Puppies 4, right? Oh, and PNH and TNH, and N.K. Jemisin, and Connie Willis, and David Gerrold, and John Scalzi, and all my friends in the Brotherhood Without Banners...

Well, George, we know you people love to sneak in and take over things others have built, but isn't this, er, a bit early? I do enjoy that you added Jemisin to your "Brotherhood" though.

Hey guys, if you will be commenting on 8chan, don't fill your name/email nor subject. It's anonymous imageboard and using your indentity there is not deemed well. It also immediately out you as newcomer.

You can also discuss the email campaing on reddit here http://www.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAction/comments/32ytzt/boycott_calgary_expo_send_emails_to_their/

It's more filtered and civilised discussion. 8chan is not for everyone, it has very specific culture that is not easy to undestand.

@Salt - I've never read any of George R.R. Martin's books, and never seen an episode of Game of Thrones. Not because I think it's bad. It's just not the kind of thing that interests me. (Swords and sorcery - no thanks. Weird sex - no thanks. Horrible people being awful to each other in a nihilistic world of betrayal and incest - no thanks. Midgets - my interest in midgets begins and ends with Terry Gilliam's Time Bandits, so no thanks)

But Game of Thrones has been such a phenomenon that I've learned quite a bit about it by osmosis, and the more I learn the more convinced I am that it's just not my cup of tea. It's like Twilight or 50 Shades of Grey - I understand the appeal to some people, admire the authors for their success, but I just don't fall into the demographic that is into that sort of thing.

So I'm not a fan. But it's still a little bit sad to see a man of 66 winters, and a world famous author to boot, reveal himself to be a bit of a dim bulb.

Leaving aside his weaksauce concern trolling, because that got boring several thousand of George's insincere words ago, this bit obviously had him rubbing his clubbed fingers together in glee:

I know you will welcome my own suggestions for Sad Puppies 4, right? Oh, and PNH and TNH, and N.K. Jemisin, and Connie Willis, and David Gerrold, and John Scalzi, and all my friends in the Brotherhood Without Banners... we all love science fiction, we all love puppies...

George, just because you write fictional characters who are masters of manipulation and deceit, doesn't mean you're good at it in real life. FYI, Stephen King can't talk to ghosts, JK Rowling can't do magic, and Jane Austen wasn't irresistible to hunky aristocrats.

The obvious answer, if I was Kate Paulk, would be "thank you for your interest in Sad Puppies 4. We welcome your suggestions and your implicit apology for all the lies you told about Sad Puppies 3. It's great to see that you've finally stopped making puppies sad. Feel free to post your suggestions and explain why you're supporting Sad Puppies 4, and why you think your suggested works should be nominated. We'll gladly consider them, and we'll be happy to add your name to our list of supporters."

Vox, lawsuits do not necessarily have to be expensive and tricky. As one of the Even More Dreaded Ilk, those who wear the Scarlet A(ttorney) on their foreheads, I have often found that the mere threat of litigation changes people's conduct. If not then, the filing of a civil complaint (relatively inexpensive) gets people's attention. I'm sure there are lawyers who side with GG/SP/RP who would enjoy some pro bono hobby litigation. At least in the U.S.; Calgary might be a different story.

FIRE (Foundation for Individual Rights in Education) undertakes litigation on behalf of individuals whose rights have been violated by educational institutions. They have a number of attorneys who volunteer their time to support this mission. Perhaps something similar could be developed on this front of the culture war. I'll give some thought to this and get back to you.

As for Honey Badger Brigade, if they have incurred a substantial economic loss due to the actions of the Expo organization and staff, and (it appears) they have evidence to support their side of the story that their ejection was improper, they would typically have a cause of action for breach of contract. The Expo staff's conduct might well rise to a level of bad faith that would cause a court to assess attorney's fees and costs of litigation.

It's a good thing I stopped reading Martin's stuff after the awful A Feast For Crows, because I'm starting to like the dude less and less with every stupid thing he writes about Sad/Rabid Puppies and Gamer Gate and SJWs.

Here is the page listing the sponsors to the Calgary Expo they were thrown out of:

http://www.calgaryexpo.com/

Speaking of attacking an adversary’s gaps or weak points, I notice that one of the sponsors is the City of Calgary. Speaking as a bureaucrat, I can say that if you ever get screwed by a bureaucrat, the best way to get even is to e-mail the elected or politically appointed officials with charges of discrimination. And here is the webpage to the list of councilors:

http://www.calgary.ca/General/Pages/Calgary-City-Council.aspx

Now, they will definitely like the business from the expo but in any group there will be competing factions and likely at least one will perceive that he can politically benefit from charges of sexism. After all, it really is a politically unassailable position as a politician to rail against this. Likely he’ll just hand it off to an assistant and say, “look into this.”

Furthermore, there are 14 councilors in addition to the mayor, 12 of whom are men. Take a look at the photos and spot the gammas. Definitely put the gammas on your e-mail list. Look for the saccharine-sweet supplicating weak smile as the mark of a gamma.

Also, be sure to post that the Calgary Expo is “engaging in sexist and misogynistic behavior,” “is against the right of women to freely express themselves,” and is “showing that they do not value the business of women-led organizations as much as they do male corporate sponsors.” Put this on jezebel and watch the feminists act as a force multiplier. After all, these people are actively looking to be offended so let’s give them a hand.

Transparency and accountability is alien concept to little kids and leftist. and that is what the are. little kids in adult body. this is why they will lie all the time. it is their nature as they were never held accountable as they grew up. spoiled brats if you will. I am with Vox on this 100%.. when talking nice fails, you have to rub their nose in it time and time again until they change their ways. no retreat, no compromise.

Ooohh! I like that "Primary Elections" versus "General Elections" trick! That is classic entryism by GWWM.

GWWM models Puppies as a political party (which it isn't) that has primary elections (which it doesn't), and card-carrying members (which it doesn't) and follows officially promulgated voting rules (of which it has none).

GWWM models Worldcon/Hugo as a general political election (which it isn't) to which various parties submit slates of human beings for election (which they don't) to be listed as party candidates on official ballots (which the Hugo "ballots" do NOT list).

Why?

To make Puppies/Vox seem "undemocratic" in comparison to the Hugos/SJWs.

But Vox has never claimed to start a political party, or get an Official Puppies Slate of Candidates on a Hugo ballot. What Vox is doing with Puppies is not akin to a "party", but to recommending a slate of candidates such as are recommended by newspaper editors (for school board elections), college activists (for student union elections), high school politicos (for student council elections) and the like.

Does anyone tell a newspaper editor to take a community vote before he speaks out for a particular candidate? No! Does anyone tell a college activist group to take a campus vote before they recommend candidates? No! Puppies are not parties. Unlike parties they have no corporate existence, no association rules, they are not registered with the government, they collect no dues, they have no membership rosters. In short Puppies have no real world existence whatsoever. "Puppies" are an abstract construct, like "lefties" or "the religious right".

Puppies are nothing more than street corner preachers (Vox/Brad/Larry) exhorting the masses.

So yes GWWM, you can always "vote" in the Puppies "primary" in the same way everyone else "votes": post on your blog, send an email to Vox/Brad/Larry. and your "vote" will be counted the way anyone else's "vote" is counted: by persuading Vox/Larry/Brad/whoever to add your recommendations to their street corner exhortations.

Even better, GWWM, instead of "voting" in Puppies "primary" feel free to start your OWN "party" on your OWN blog by listing the candidates YOU support. Maybe call it the "GoodThink SJW Party".

indeed, why do you want to "vote" in Vox's "primary election" when you can have your full, complete, 100% personally owned "party" all to yourself?

No lefty wants to take responsibility for another lefty's political correctness. Its easy enough to pile on with some sleazy rhetoric it is another to fight someone's battle for them

As for GM's attempt at divide and conquer, IMO all he did was open his side up for negotiation, and I don't think they want it. If I were running a slate of puppies call it the "Politically Incorrect White Puppies of Doom" I would counter offer since they are chock full of left wing racial theorists, bigots and in some cases I would bet racial supremacists that my slate would want Harold Covington recognized for his works. Technically he is a better writer than most of their fringe if not someone of the SJW mainstays.

I saw "intolerante" and assumed Vox was coining a word for a new brand of intolerance. In this case, the added "e" would functionally effeminate the word, and perhaps even parody it as some kind of champion for the elite, as if only the truly brilliant know just how to be intolerant(e) in the right ways.

Brad Torgensen has added a post to his blog: "Sad Puppies: We Are Not Rabid Puppies."

Larry Correia has also spoken up on MONSTER HUNTER NATION: "I Am Not Vox Day."

I commend them both for making the distinction so loudly and clearly.

Thanks, Salt. As I said before, GRRM is trying the classic old SJW unctuous divide-and-conquer trick with Correia and Torgersen. He is just ratcheting it up more now that Correia and Torgersen are showing cracks in their walls.

> Hey guys, if you will be commenting on 8chan, don't fill your name/email nor subject. It's anonymous imageboard and using your indentity there is not deemed well. It also immediately out you as newcomer.

Which is one of the many reasons I can't get "anonymous boards". Why provide name, email and subject fields if they don't want it to be used? Also the ambiance is quite chaotic and hostile, people get chided for the most trivial reasons. Anyone has to fit with the "accepted" group behavior. Honesty I see no difference between these boards ans the SJW behavior, except for the positions defended. This is why I am going to keep the discussion elsewhere.

I suggest you find out the name of the company running the expo. there was British Co than was going to run the largest Outdoor Expo in Harrisburg Pa. Reed Exhibitions said a vendor could not show a photo of a Modern Sporting Rifle. In response the entire show was cancelled since the vendors from RV sellers and Boats sellers pulled out. The NRA ran the show the next year.

Martin's continuing tactic of attempted othering is why I've been so disappointed in both Larry and Brad. They could easily have just said "Talk to Vox about Vox", but they've instead chosen to play the "but we're not like HIM" card.

I read those two guy's responses to GM with his weak divide and conquer effort, no big deal IMO.

What I imagine the puppies effort in total doing is removing the SJWs as the voice of authority and this will embolden the people, the timids who were hurt by the SJW vermin to speak up and begin the destruction of that particular cult.

From what I read of GM he probably wishes the SJW cult were defanged as well, because IMO he is just another loopy old man who was taken in by the entryists and knows full well he is one of the "next."

Which is one of the many reasons I can't get "anonymous boards". Why provide name, email and subject fields if they don't want it to be used? Also the ambiance is quite chaotic and hostile, people get chided for the most trivial reasons. Anyone has to fit with the "accepted" group behavior. Honesty I see no difference between these boards ans the SJW behavior, except for the positions defended. This is why I am going to keep the discussion elsewhere.

You either undestand it by yourself, or won't understand it at all. One does not speak about fight club. What you consider hostile is a norm. When you make hostility a norm, hostility loses its meaning.

I read those two guy's responses to GM with his weak divide and conquer effort, no big deal IMO.

It's not weak. I rather thought so too at first, but GRRM's latest blog post (which Salt excerpted above) slapped me across the face as a wake-up call. He knows exactly what he's doing, how much honey to apply, and when. Correia and Torgersen snapped at the bait with their "but we're not Vox" protestations, and now he's reeling them in.

From what I read of GM he probably wishes the SJW cult were defanged as well, because IMO he is just another loopy old man who was taken in by the entryists and knows full well he is one of the "next."

He wishes no such thing. He's a full SJW, and quite comfortable being one. The plots of Game of Thrones series makes that clear. As for him being afraid of being "next", I pretty much guarantee you that he is thinking no such thing.

It's not weak. I rather thought so too at first, but GRRM's latest blog post (which Salt excerpted above) slapped me across the face as a wake-up call. He knows exactly what he's doing, how much honey to apply, and when. Correia and Torgersen snapped at the bait with their "but we're not Vox" protestations, and now he's reeling them in.

According to LC, that wasn't a response to GRRM, but a clarification for people he personally knows. If true, I think it would be good for LC to make a "I am not GRRM" post in the same vein. Since GRRM thought the "I am not Vox Day" post was a positive format, he shouldn't object.

Email's sent to the sponsors. The likely effect of these things will be an end to sponsorships for comics expos, as companies will not want to take the risk of being caught up in these sort of storms. Gee, tragic. An ex-coworker of mine went to one recently in Seattle. He posted pictures to FB. Astonishing how many fat women appear to think dressing up like comic book girls and coloring their hair purple will make them look good.

I read those two guy's responses to GM with his weak divide and conquer effort, no big deal IMO.

I read both Larry and Brad's responses and it doesn't bode well that they seem to be falling for GRRM's trick. Georgie is already trying to get a say in future Sad Puppies slates. Hopefully they will soon realize it's hopeless to try to engage GRRM honestly in any way or attempt appeasement.

Well we disagree I view LC's and BT's and entryism to begin the negotiations of negating the SJW cult from being the voice of authority.

If I read one of the responses from LC correctly he even called many of the supporters of the Left "racists." So even if BT and LC publically denounce Alinskyism he sure is applying it to them, but if I misread it and he doesn't think those racial theorizing obsessives are in fact "racists" then he is a dumbass.

Want to divide SJW from GM, that is quite simple, deliver a consistent message that GM glorifies "rape culture."

If taken at face value, LC and Brad have unequivocally made a bright-line; We are not Rabid Puppies. I find this interesting as next year's SP head-honcho is Kate, the Impaler. GRRM, knowing now where that line is, has crossed into their territory. Was better when it was obscured, un-defined, the skirmishers having been dispatched to where unknown. Could also be a come onto my parlor said the spider to the fly.

"GRRM has the whole lefty playbook and he's going through it step by step, isn't he?"

First he ordered pizza in Vox's name, then he wrote in a men's room stall what is next in the playbook?

GRRM's girlfriends endorse Hillary for president and talk about economicshttp://twitchy.com/2015/04/17/hookers-for-hillary-our-next-potus-scores-the-ultimate-endorsement-photo/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lbD3jVIWoY0

MsGamer in your opinion was what was done to those women at that expo right?

Internet theorizing that women have fucked up society for voting for scumbags with spiffy rhetoric is one thing, but to actually expel someone from an expo and lying about the reasons is IMO a legal matter.

But then again maybe you should be consulted as to what women should think and say, perhaps you could even argue from an intellectual viewpoint (I doubt it, really, really doubt that).

You know what is really horrible, basically the SJW argument against Vox is that "Vox is poopyhead", that's it and add the usual rhetorical words blah, blah, blah.

Mantra,If what happened to the women at the expo is a matter for litigation, then let it be litigated.

I was merely noting that in Mr. Day's view, women are so incompetent they out to be stripped of their most basic democratic rights, leaving them no option but to come crawling to men to see their interests are represented. Yeah, it's just an opinion, but it's the kind of foolish and mysoginistic opinion that makes even the dumbest human beings shake their head in disgust.

And let's not forget the "Women make everything worse" mantra that Mr. Day has offered up.o wonder if he includes the women kicked out of the Expo in that charge.

Correia and Torgersen snapped at the bait with their "but we're not Vox" protestations, and now he's reeling them in.

No, they didn't. And no, he isn't. They both quite firmly refused to disavow or shun as demanded. Perhaps pointing out the obvious is not optimal, but it is by no means what the SJWs were seeking from them.

A refusal to go on the offensive is not a surrender. And one has to pick one's battles. They are not going to defend my words and rhetoric and there is no need for them to do so. I'm perfectly capable of doing that on my own. I would expect they recognized George's SJW tactics before you did. If they'd rather risk further pressure than go on the attack, that's their call and I have no problem with it.

So, yes. You can be accused of at least advocating that all women be driven from public discourse.

Wrong. Advocating no vote for women does not equal women be driven from public discourse. Even during the women's voting rights debate, women were publicly involved in the discourse, weighing in on both sides of the issue.

Vox: No, they didn't. And no, he isn't. They both quite firmly refused to disavow or shun as demanded. Perhaps pointing out the obvious is not optimal, but it is by no means what the SJWs were seeking from them.

Well, you both know what's going on better than I do... but even so, it's far better that our SJW BS alarms be a bit too sensitive than not sensitive enough. If you give them an inch...

MsGamer wrote: Well, you are the one that keep urging and arguing for all women to be stripped of the vote, and who make everything worse.

Nuance isn't your strong suit, is it?

I'm going to lay out what I think Vox's approach to government is, based on what I've read. If I'm wrong, I hope he'll correct me.

First, the truest, best form of government is a covenantal Monarchy. Nobody gets to vote, because the sovereign is the Risen, and Present, Jesus Christ.

Second, since Jesus hasn't returned yet, the next best form of government would be a true democracy where, powered by modern technology, everyone votes on everything. There might be age restrictions, based on the science that the judgment centers of the brain aren't fully developed until 22 or 23. There might be a requirement that nothing passes unless a certain percentage of the eligible population votes. There might be a requirement that a voter can only vote for spending their own money and not that of other people. There might be a requirement that some things cannot be voted on. Channeling Heinlein, there might be a requirement that nothing passes unless by 66% or more; and anything can be repealed by at least 33%.

Third, given that we don't have a full participative democracy, and given that Vox values freedom over security; I suspect Vox wants to limit the franchise to men, since women, statistically, vote for security over freedom, which is anathema to a free society.

And, I just asked my lovely wife if she would be happy in a society where no woman was allowed to vote. "I'd have to say, 'yes'" was her response.

The Mary Sue article brings an interesting quote from the SPLC (wow, they are a fucking joke):

"The Honey Badgers are a diverse group of female gender apostates–women who oppose outdated ideas of gender, particularly the association of womanhood with weakness. We offer an alternative to the damaging portrayal of women as victims of geek and gamer culture."

Now, there's the obvious stuff, like how this is explicit cult behaviour. But really, the big crime of Honey Badgers wasn't even suppoting Gamergate, it was something far more simple:

Betraying Team Women.

The army of "Not all women are like that!", that will defend a woman from anything, want to make fucking illegal to defy the "sisterhood".

"No. Voting is not the sole public discourse. I support free speech for women. Obviously, the SJWs don't."

No. You are right. It isn't the sole form of public discourse. Just the one in which power is exercised. And let's face it. Anyone willing to strip the vote from women is just one more hissy fit away from advocating that women not speak without the permission of men. So much better than the Social Justic Champions you don't begin to understand.

They will try to take the mile. But that won't work with either Larry or Brad. Both men have proved themselves staunch. If they wish to fight at line Y rather than line X, that's their call. I have no doubt that they will fight rather than submit. None.

Among the many problems with you speculations is that men have proven that they can't be trusted to protect women's freedom. Given the chance they will limit their economic freedom for sure and their personal freedoms in numerous ways.

Among the many problems with you speculations is that men have proven that they can't be trusted to protect women's freedom. Given the chance they will limit their economic freedom for sure and their personal freedoms in numerous ways.

Harsh,It's not absurd in the least. Mr. Day's desire to revoke the vote from women is his own way of saying women have too much power by virtue of voting. If power was not implicated in voting there would be no reason to revoke it from the people who make everything worse.

It's "wrf3", not "wtf". I let that pass when John C. Wright does it. You, not so much. You haven't earned the right to be disrespectful. Unless you're John in a dress, chumming the waters.

Among the many problems with you speculations is that men have proven that they can't be trusted to protect women's freedom. Given the chance they will limit their economic freedom for sure and their personal freedoms in numerous ways.

You do realize, do you not, that women are just as bad as limiting the freedom of men -- if not worse? As just one example, men having to pay support for children they didn't sire? Or are you just yet another hypocrite blind to their own hypocrisy? Good grief, the whole point of Vox's post is showing how women limit the freedom of other women.

And let's not forget the "Women make everything worse" mantra that Mr. Day has offered up.

It's a quote from some blogger of yore (IIRC, "The Baseball Savant"), and it goes: "Women Ruin Everything."

Yes, it's hyperbole, but it does have a basis in observable facts that many clubs and organizations that used to be for men only, that changed their rules and allowed women entry, have ALWAYS resulted in changing the dynamics and rules of said organizations to accommodate women's feeeelllllinnnngs.

For instance, their never has, and their never will be a group of Gamer guys who get upset and/or protest video games that depict "unrealistic" portrayals of muscle bound Adonis-type males as "objectifying" and "degrading."

But you female Gamers sure seem to think it's important that all video games need to conform to some sort of standard that doesn't make you lady Gamers uncomfortable with female caricatures that highlight the features that men find sexually appealing (big tits, plump asses and long hair).

It's true. You women who want to invade all male spaces in the name of equality, do indeed ruin everything.

Restrictions on obtaining credit without their husbands consent, on the right to enter professions, on abortion,

A husband is financially responsible for his wife so it's only common sense he should have a say in her obtaining credit. Only a child would argue otherwise.

No, men would require that women meet the same basic requirements they do to enter a given profession. Again, just common sense. A lot of women just want a free pass to do anything they want even if they are grossly incompetent.

I'll agree with you on abortion. Any sane person would want to take away the "right" to snuff out an innocent human being.

I was at home one weekend, relaxing in my recliner, doing something -- consequential or not -- on the computer, when my wife told me that our neighborhood e-mail group was abuzz with chatter about someone dressed in a Star Wars stormtrooper outfit walking about our neighborhood and carrying a gun.

The e-mailers, all women, were all aflutter, wondering "what should be done?" and considering whether or not the police should be called.

I went outside to see what was up. It was a young man who had made the costume himself, including the replica gun, and was walking up and down the sidewalk in order to get the feel of his outfit. Because he and some others were going to be visiting children in a hospital dressed as Star Wars characters.

Harah,Why should men be responsible for women? Because men say so. Here, women's interest were not protected.

Women were restricted from becoming lawyers and doctors in many states where only men voted. There is no reasonable explanation for this that has to do with competence. Here again women's economic interests were ignored

Vox Day: I know that Ezra Levant at his website 'The Rebel' www.therebel.media would be interested in this. Ezra is from Alberta but has despaired at what has happened to Calgary ever since Nenshi became mayor of the city. Ezra raised money for victims of a Muslim attack during a protest in Calgary one summer. He loves stories like this. His website is THE place for Canadian conservatives and may be of interest to Americans and others as well. Thanks.

Among the many problems with you speculations is that men have proven that they can't be trusted to protect women's freedom. Given the chance they will limit their economic freedom for sure and their personal freedoms in numerous ways.

Au contraire....you women have proven that as soon as you are given these freedoms, the first thing ya'all concern yourselves with, is limiting or taking away freedom for all.

What was the very first thing you women did with the vote in the USA as soon as you got it? Prohibition.

Any one who values freedom, would do well to keep women from voting as a bloc.

I emailed the sponsors, sent a nice email, and I received one back from Jody of Rue Morgue, a magazine devoted to horror, stating "please stop emailing...you look foolish at this point...This is not how one handles a business situation."

Clearly, this Jody is with the SJWs who would shut people up. I urge all to not patronize or visit their site in any way.

If that's what you went, then I'll be glad to. Except that I see Harsh already did it. Joint assets (and, in marriage, all assets are joint) should be jointly approved. The husband shouldn't be able to get credit without his wife's approval, and the wife shouldn't be able to get credit without the husband's approval.

As for jobs, I don't care what a person's gender is as long as they are qualified. I utterly reject selecting someone for a position based on gender, or race, or creed. The sole criteria is whether or not they are qualified. If there are multiple equally qualified candidates, then select one at random.

As for abortion, of course it should be outlawed. No right thinking individual wants to kill an innocent in the womb.

Remember a few years back when Larry Correia asked this question? Remember the answer he was given? Yeah, right back at you, George. If you want to nominate, convince your fans to show up and vote. That's what they told our side, and we went and did it.

Make your own slate, bring your friends out, and may the best works win.

MsGamer - You talk like you think anyone who wishes to restrict the franchise is taking crazy talk, when that simple proposition was accepted from the founding of the United States until the Liberal Revolution of 1968.

Since by nearly any metric you would choose to pick, the U.S. prior to that time was healthier, happier and more free, many of us don't think the two are unrelated. So, it's not just a question of women's votes, but even larger than that.

I understand that to modern ears such things sound horrific, but you should know that much of what those of us on the other side see and hear around us daily is even more horrific.

Quick example: I was in the an elevator at work last week, when a middle-aged woman came on board on the fourth floor. She saw a friend she hadn't seen in a while.

"Oh, you're back!""Yes, just back from maternity leave. Today is my first day back. It was hard to come back today, let me tell you.""Was it a boy or a girl?""A girl"

And with that the middle-aged woman did a militant fist punch in the air and said "YES!!!" in a manner that made it clear that a boy child would not have been nearly as welcome.

This is your ideology, where the miracle of birth is reduced to mere tribalism, and the only cause for celebration is the creation of another vote for your preferred interest group.

This is your ideology, where a woman expressing such hateful, anti-human vitriol feels perfectly free, while the situation in reverse, with a middle-aged man making it clear a girl child would have been unwelcome, is completely legally sanctionable, both officially and in a private context.

You believe you are standing up for the good and the true, and for right. I understand that; I used to believe the same. I also know that if you're here, reading and commenting, there is a part of you that is driven to do so because there is some part of you in which the arguments made here are resonating.

p-dawg April 18, 2015 12:28 PM27 bucks for a plain t-shirt with an ironed-on patch?

a - you'll spend a couple of hundred just to attend WorldCon but $30 is too much to actually make the attendance worthwhile?b - you can still cheap out for $13 for a SPhttp://www.cafepress.com/artraccoonsstudioshop.1492109784c - or you COULD flex your biceps in a female oppressing wife beater for $20http://www.cafepress.com/artraccoonsstudioshop.1499111166

MsGamer April 18, 2015 3:03 PMAmong the many problems with you speculations is that men have proven that they can't be trusted to protect women's freedom.

MEN are the ones who GAVE YOU all of your precious freedoms, you bimbo retard.

The publisher of Rue Macabre, unlike his PR person, is a reasonable person and his reply to my follow-up email said that he won't take action until the facts are known but that he will expect a full report next week after the close of the expo.

Are you all cool with Calgary Expo excluding an all-women group after they paid $10,000 to participate? Do you support this intolerant, anti-diversity behavior? How about exclusion due to politics?

If that is all good with you, keep quiet and don't use your sponsorship of Calgary Expo to get them to stop harassing women's groups. Me and mine will know what stuff you're made of and act accordingly with our discretionary income."

Its interesting that in light if all the talk of distancing oneself, GRRM then asks the sad puppies to include confirmed racist NK Jamison. I for one would appreciate GRRM offering an apology and confirming that he does not condone her actions. And if he thinks there is NO PLACE IN SOCIETY... FAN NOMINATIONS... for such unrepentant racists.

Guys, MsGamer is GG, a troll who gets off on men verbally putting her in her place. Proceed accordingly.

I was wondering when someone was going to notice. Noah B, it's just the pattern of her remarks and the tone she writes in. I guess she still hasn't met her billionaire 50 Shades guy yet. Or maybe she did and he didn't have good enough gags.

@MsGamer"Restrictions on obtaining credit without their husbands consent"

The husband is on the hook for every credit card debt the wife accumulates. Besides, you don't need credit and credit cards. I never had a need for them since I've spent less than I've earned for my entire life.

Seems obvious to me, but I can't go into detail without giving her hints on how to disguise herself. Vox can confirm if he wishes, but it's not like it matters. If she's not GG, she's her clone, and might as well be dealt with the same.

@ManiacProvost"The purpose of granting the franchise to rich, already-powerful white men is to put a stop to violent rebellions. Any faction powerful and organized enough to revolt can gain what it wants peacefully.

There is no point in giving a vote to disorganized, ineffective people with no ability to execute long term plans."

The Honey Badger Brigade has pointed out before that that because most of them are women, they're listened to rather more than most MRA's. This is another illustration of that. Irony of supressing the opinions and commerce of women for the sake of feminism aside, there would be only the most technical grounds for legal remedy.

I don't see how you can be a feminist against the honey badgers here, any more than I can see how you can be a liberal for this act of anti-pluralism. Is feminism only seeking to promote the interest of some women? Does liberalism edit away certain colours out of its beloved rainbow?

If rights or the interests of groups and persons conflict, how are we to negotiate the, except by evidence, reason and a generosity of spirit? Where is that generosity? Why is it that "Social Justice" is synonym for "kill joy?"

Before anyone dares to commit themselves to a position or action based on justice they would do well to ask the old question: "Am I seeking to protect the innocent, or merely punish the guilty?"

Feminism has always been about advancement for only a select group of women: this is patently obvious when you ask how your everyone woman can be a CEO and a supermom, and the non-ironic response is get a nanny.

Security staff approached the HBB booth, ordered us to leave, and refused to state the reason why unless Alison Tieman agreed to speak to them away from the other members of the group, without recording.

Time to play by the SJW rules, perhaps?

"The only reason to ISOLATE a WOMAN away from her friends with no recording ability has to be RAPE! Yes, we see the RAPE CULTURE at work here!"

Seriously, accuse the security people of planning rape. Scream loudly. Protest the "rape culture" at work. Demand to know what possible legitimate reason there could be for isolation, no witnesses, etc. Accuse the organizers of promoting rape culture. Demand a change in security guards immediately, because rape!

Guys, MsGamer is GG, a troll who gets off on men verbally putting her in her place. Proceed accordingly.

MsGamer is Greg Gutfeld? Sounds about right. Oh, c'mon. If we can goad Fox into mentioning it, maybe Obama will weigh in before all is said and done. Let's get this party started. The more the merrier.

In the United States- truth is an absolute defense against libel and slander. If you can prove what you said is true- there is no libel. Not so in Canada and the UK, and much of the rest of the world. CalEx took action against the HBB on the basis of libelous (and probably provable lies) on social media. Big oops on their part. HBB does have actionable claims, in Canada. They should pursue them. In the words of another well known blogger- punch back twice as hard.

Mayor emailed - radfems gonna get a wakeup call sooner than i thought. Apparently Mexico has changed laws so men are not discriminated against in child custody cases. I didn't research it very much as I have a bit too much on at the moment, but if true it may be the beginning of the tide turning.

Okay, I'm a luddite. I thought we were supposed to write an email on that site. I have now corrected myself and sent my email:

I was saddened to learn that bullying and false charges were used against the group Honey Badgers for no apparent reason than for having a different opinions. It has been noted that Fan Expo Canada banned Honey Badger Brigade (HBB) from the Calgary Comics and Entertainment Expo (CalEx).

Do you support Thought Police?

Is this another rush to judgment, people guilty of no crime but innuendo? Is this like the rape hoax perpetrated by Rolling Stone magazine?

Security forced the Honey Badgers from the Expo with no reason given based it seems on charges from another group. Does that sound totalitarian?

Is this friendly? Is this how you do business? Do you engage in smear campaigns? You believe and act on smear campaigns?

I did not know that we have to have "political correctness" orthodoxy in order to attend Calgary conventions. Wow. Canada, the unfree state.

I hope they get the message. I sent it the Mayor and the four sponsors.

Napoleon became loved by all of France when he repudiated credit on women & children. At the time "you know who" where doing the scams outlined by Martin Luther and coming up with false credit claims when men died to basically enslave women & children with debt. Now a married man is on the hook for student loan debt, car loans and CC, gay marriage I will pass.

"Women were restricted from becoming lawyers and doctors in many states where only men voted."

Women take 43% more sick days than men, 44% of female doctors work part time. Until nurses pushed the issue, doctors in training had to work hellish hours as a trial by fire so that if they get a call at 3am they know how to think.

"The main reason that these restrictions do not exist is due to a manufactured "right" to abortion",

~ Don't forget that ROE admitted to lying before the Supremes to get a perfect case, just like Rosa Parks was a set up and HilLIARy's people spent over 1/2 an hour vetting people that she supposedly meet on the street. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3040482/Campaign-staff-DROVE-ordinary-Iowans-Hillary-s-campaign-stop-including-health-care-lobbyist-training-Obama-campaign-intern-Biden-chauffeur.html

If you give them an inch...~ lets be honest I am a top and even I would be disappointed if a guy I meet only had an inch to give.

"Yes, just back from maternity leave. Today is my first day back. It was hard to come back today, let me tell you."

Woman hired the same day as a man with last initial before his can go off preg multiple times and still be ahead in seniority.

GRRM has already defended NK because of the injustice to St. Trayvon.~ Skittles girlfriend testified the first day that skittles thought GZ was gay and cheaking him out making it a failed gay bashing.

@MsGamer"Restrictions on obtaining credit without their husbands consent"

The husband is on the hook for every credit card debt the wife accumulates. Besides, you don't need credit and credit cards. I never had a need for them since I've spent less than I've earned for my entire life.

Somehow MsGamer thinks it's her right to spend as much as she wants and plunge her poor husband into an ocean of debt. Such is the mind of the modern American woman that this equates with "rights".

There was British Co than was going to run the largest Outdoor Expo in Harrisburg Pa. Reed Exhibitions said a vendor could not show a photo of a Modern Sporting Rifle. In response the entire show was cancelled since the vendors from RV sellers and Boats sellers pulled out.

The NRA ran the show the next year.

That was Reed Elsevier.

This is another UK company, Informa. Their Canadian branch owns the Fan Expo franchise.

Next weekend they are holding one in Regina, Sask. next weekend, in Dallas at the end of May, and one in Toronto on Labor Day Weekend.

The University of Calgary is conducting a survey on GamerGate and video games journalism. You might want to let them know how you think.

Informa's head Lord Carter of Barnes CBE may also be very interested in hearing about the incompetence of his Canadian team running the Calgary Expo and other expos where Alison Tieman has been "banned for life."

This makes me mad. Unlike me, the Honey Badgers are nice people. I just recently listened to the YouTube radio show with Brad Torgersen, Sarah Hoyt and Mike Williamson. They were really looking forward to that con as the one big thing to spend their money on this year, to all get together in one place. To be treated like that is beyond the pale.

"Fax Expo is a business. Any business has the right to refuse service. Why would they want a little group of people to aggravate the vast majority of their customers? That's bad business." - mistresskasarr

Interesting, any business has the right to refuse service you say?

Unless of course until it's time to provide gays with wedding cakes, then big daddy government steps in to change the rules.

False. "... since the local governments have partial ownership of the Expo, the official actions against Tieman and her group may constitute civil rights violations under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms."

Any business has the right to refuse service.

False. That is a worthy goal to aim for, but in the meantime, it would be absurd to unilaterally disarm.

Why would they want a little group of people to aggravate the vast majority of their customers?

Assumes facts not in evidence.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blogPlease do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.